Official "PLEASE KEEP DEALT RB" Thread

[PowerhausAA]

Originally Posted by WiCane

They must have changed the number of points per $1 of rake because I"m in the same boat as you.

$2419 rake generated = 11,934 pts or 4.93 pts per $1. I think on Merge it was 10pts per $1.

this is the big problem........i have very similar numbers to that
has anyone compared this point system to other sites and its true value? if it was 7 points per dollar it would make more sense? (but it would still make ronin/vip tiers harder)

will lock be even willing to change this??!!? i was shooting for 200,200 tier points for ronin but the way the points are adding up im gonna have to shoot for like half of that if i chose to just keep playing SH cash games and there just isnt enough sng's in a day to play to get up this high

DEALT is farrrrrrrrrrrrr superior, it keeps a lot of players playing for a very very long time, on a microeconomics level very small percentage will thrive off contributed but ultimately it will bite the hand that feeds em. that post by chazley is right on the money.

[Chazley]

Originally Posted by AUGUY55

So when I move to my roll back to Black chip am I really going to see a difference in my rakeback because merge is contributed rb or whatever? I would assume I will because the merge client is faster and can get you more hands per hour and I can mass table easier on merge.

Was just wondering if I'm really going to see a difference. I'm assuming I will see more RB because I'll be able to play more hands and tables on bcp.

If you are on the rb system on revolution, you will probably see a double digit % decrease in your rb if you are a winning player.

[thenextlevel1]

I can assure you the only person that wins with contributed rakeback in the house. There is a reason why 95% of poker room have contributed rakeback. They can offer 45% rakeback deals and only really be giving 30% to players. They know that loose losing player pay more rake that a solid 22/18 player, but since they never have rakeback the house gets to keep most the money.

[Chazley]

Lock continues to do their promotions right, and I applaud them. They have made an effort to reward their most loyal, high volume players in a market where most poker sites shun their most loyal customers. Despite a very rocky start in other areas, Lock/Revolution has figured out/knows what works to keep a player base growing. If they fix other aspects of their business, Lock will surely explode. For now, even with all the extra issues, Lock has seen a modest increase in player traffic since their switch to Revolution.

Meanwhile, Pokerstars continues to see massive declines in traffic since their switch from Dealt to Contributed RB. It is now a 33% decline in traffic the last 6 months, which is staggering for the most reputable and successful poker site in history. I attribute this solely to their poor decision to cannibalize their player base by switching to Contributed RB from Dealt. As it turns out, creating unsustainable rake/rakeback models in such a tough present-day online poker scene isn't a sound business decision.

Keep doing it right Lock, and let your player base grow.

[d3 fact0]

Originally Posted by Chazley

Lock continues to do their promotions right, and I applaud them. They have made an effort to reward their most loyal, high volume players in a market where most poker sites shun their most loyal customers. Despite a very rocky start in other areas, Lock/Revolution has figured out/knows what works to keep a player base growing. If they fix other aspects of their business, Lock will surely explode. For now, even with all the extra issues, Lock has seen a modest increase in player traffic since their switch to Revolution.

Meanwhile, Pokerstars continues to see massive declines in traffic since their switch from Dealt to Contributed RB. It is now a 33% decline in traffic the last 6 months, which is staggering for the most reputable and successful poker site in history. I attribute this solely to their poor decision to cannibalize their player base by switching to Contributed RB from Dealt. As it turns out, creating unsustainable rake/rakeback models in such a tough present-day online poker scene isn't a sound business decision.

Keep doing it right Lock, and let your player base grow.

Looking at your pathetic attempts at securing a stake in the marketplace, it's quite obvious that you are one of those parasites who doesn't earn all that much from actually playing poker, instead majority of your "profits" come from cannibalizing a % of the rake from the rake contributing players, i.e. you are a FPP wannabe-pro!

Bro, here is some sincere advise. Go to school and take some basic courses in logic, economics, and statistics! All of the arguments you make in favor of dealt vs contributed RB methods, are unsound, invalid, and are simply ignorant in the way the actual internet poker economy functions! It's just some nonsensical, subjective, and wishful thinking "verbal" diarrhea.

[Mccormick]

Originally Posted by d3 fact0

Looking at your pathetic attempts at securing a stake in the marketplace, it's quite obvious that you are one of those parasites who doesn't earn all that much from actually playing poker, instead majority of your "profits" come from cannibalizing a % of the rake from the rake contributing players, i.e. you are a FPP wannabe-pro!

Bro, here is some sincere advise. Go to school and take some basic courses in logic, economics, and statistics! All of the arguments you make in favor of dealt vs contributed RB methods, are unsound, invalid, and are simply ignorant in the way the actual internet poker economy functions! It's just some nonsensical, subjective, and wishful thinking "verbal" diarrhea.

People who bash others for winning on rakeback rather than "pure profit" are just too dumb for words. You do realise that without rake they'd be big winners in the first place. They win at the game, but due to rake being taken they only win that portion which they get back. What's the limit for you? If rake would be 20% of every pot instead, would you still win? The border is different for everyone.

And no, his points are in no way invalid. Dealt is indeed far superior for us, the customers, but your dumb ass will only notice this in your bottom line going down once they do actually change this

[d3 fact0]

Originally Posted by Mccormick

People who bash others for winning on rakeback rather than "pure profit" are just too dumb for words. You do realise that without rake they'd be big winners in the first place. They win at the game, but due to rake being taken they only win that portion which they get back. What's the limit for you? If rake would be 20% of every pot instead, would you still win? The border is different for everyone.

And no, his points are in no way invalid. Dealt is indeed far superior for us, the customers, but your dumb ass will only notice this in your bottom line going down once they do actually change this

When I look at my own HM records, my own profits at the tables are about 3 x of the rake that I pay... As far as Chazley's logic, the dummy looks at issues in a complete vacum neglecting other important variable and factors. Not to mention that the poor kid has no analytic framework to even be capable of analyzing or even addressing the issues he attempts to chime in on. But since I am making a decent living on Merge and Revolution as a U.S. based player, I simply do not have the time to come on here and break down every one of his fallacies. I am making money, and as long as I keep making good money in the current climate I simply do not give a s**t about some FPP wannabe pros trying to push their incoherent or fallacious arguments onto the few gaulible souls who are dumb enough to fall for it... In fact it would be counterproductive sinse it's these low I.Q. fish off of whom I profit. I just come in here for fun once in a while to put some delusional and low I.Q. FPP wannabe-pro in his place... Trust me, the people who get my reasoning, are the ones who are still making money from U.S. post BF. The rest of you who want to argue with me, are the very same tools who keep feeding me, month in and month out...

[Chazley]

Lol, dont pretend you know me bro. Im not gonna derail this thread responding to your idiotic comments - i am a winning poker player even if i got 0% rb. That is irrelevant to this thread though, because my argument in thia thread has everything to do with ho the site can increase their numbers/bottom line, without even getting into the fact that players who are informed on the issue overwhelmingly prefer dealt.

Also, it is highly likely you arent a cash reg de facto, based on context clues. Therefore, this issue has zero effect on you.

[d3 fact0]

Originally Posted by Chazley

Lol, dont pretend you know me bro. Im not gonna derail this thread responding to your idiotic comments - i am a winning poker player even if i got 0% rb. That is irrelevant to this thread though, because my argument in thia thread has everything to do with ho the site can increase their numbers/bottom line, without even getting into the fact that players who are informed on the issue overwhelmingly prefer dealt.

Also, it is highly likely you arent a cash reg de facto, based on context clues. Therefore, this issue has zero effect on you.

honestly I can't be bothered tearing up everyone of your silly and fallacious claims. I am too busy making $$$ in the post BF IP climate, chasing tail, or resting. But I'll put one thing out there just for fun. Afaik, everyone who plays on PS is by default in their rewards program. There is no preferential treatment of any sort, unless you are a PS sponsored pro. So claiming that the site just gets to keep all of the rake generated by the lose fish, is simply not true. Having said that, with the contributed RB rewards scheme, everyone earns exactly a set fraction of what they contribute per their individual rewards level.

Now you absolutely love to point out Stars' 30% decrease in cash traffic, since the switch to contributed "RB" method.

Do you even know how to think about something like that objectively? E.g. here is a crude model of what's taking place. Imagine for a moment, if your IQ is capable of it, a 24-table cash grinder, whose entire business model was based on the dealt-hand "RB" method. Is it so crazy to think that once PS switched from dealt to contributed, that this 24-table dealt hand RB grinder, whose skill set was optimized specifically to grind 24-tables for FPPs under a deal-hand "RB" scheme, would no longer be as profitable under the contributed "RB" setup as he was under the dealt? Is it so crazy to think that maybe under the contributed, the formerly dealt-hand FPP pro would reduce the number of tables that he plays from 24 down to 15-16 (35% reduction), b/c his former 'get paid 2 fold' strategy no longer yields him the same profits? And now he actually has to contribute something into the pot to have a chance at a profit... To criticize stars about their decision is not only ignorant, myopic, and simply uneducated, but more importantly it assumes that starts main objective is to ensure that some wannabe fpp pro will make his next month's rent payment.

Stars is number one in the industry, and its their main objective to remain in this position or to stay completely competitive for the foreseeable future. And guess what? For them to maintain their market leader position, they must above all look out for the interest of the recreational player, the true and ultimate source of $$$ in the poker economy. So what if their cash traffic fell by 30%, the real test is how has the climate improved for the recreational player. I tell you what, for an average schmuck, the quality of the games, and hence the enjoyment of the games is better under contributed RB scheme than it is under dealt! And if you look beyond your next month's rent payment, assuming you moved out of your mom's basement, you'll realize that during a 10-20 year span, a contributed RB method will be a lot better for the internet poker economy, as it will ensure a more friendly playing environment for the recreational players, the ultimate source of $$$ in the poker economy!

[Schwatt]

I don't understand how you don't understand de facto.

You admit yourself, that dealt RB keeps bad players and rec players playing longer, and you dissern that this is somehow a bad thing? Do you hate money? Do you like playing against good regs only?

[Chazley]

So much fail in de factos post. Its teetering on sad so ill leave him alone.

[d3 fact0]

Originally Posted by Schwatt

I don't understand how you don't understand de facto.

You admit yourself, that dealt RB keeps bad players and rec players playing longer, and you dissern that this is somehow a bad thing? Do you hate money? Do you like playing against good regs only?

honestly, I absolutely have no clue what you are talking about, b/c what you state above, is pretty much completely opposite of my reasoning and analysis... But just so there is no misunderstanding, Dealt RB method, at the Margin, DOES NOT help bad players NOR DOES it keep the fish in action longer, ceterus paribus!

edit: in the above context are define the 'bad players' or fish, as those who are net losers, after including RB and other promotions. The b/e or FPP "pros" are not included in this category.

[d3 fact0]

Originally Posted by Chazley

So much fail in de factos post. Its teetering on sad so ill leave him alone.

With all of the trolling you do in my direction, NOT once have you actually been able to demonstrate a flaw in my logic or analysis. It's always some silly 'name-calling', b/c lets be honest, you are simply not smart enough nor analytically equipped to conduct any sort of rational and objective analysis on the issues you are trying to address. The bottom line is that your true motivation is purely the fact that you really don't make much $$$ from actually playing poker, instead w/e few bucks you do end up earning come from RB and promotions. Hence why you are trying so hard to defend the dealt RB method. There is nothing new under the sun, and your arguments and actions are nothing more than advocacy for protectionism. In other words, you are nothing more than a parasite fighting to preserve his "free-lunch"... Unless your IQ is just too low, I sincerely advise you to go to school and get some basic education, in economics, statistics, and logic, b/c right now to those of us who actually have a clue, you just keep making an ass out of yourself.

[Chazley]

Originally Posted by d3 fact0

With all of the trolling you do in my direction, NOT once have you actually been able to demonstrate a flaw in my logic or analysis. It's always some silly 'name-calling', b/c lets be honest, you are simply not smart enough nor analytically equipped to conduct any sort of rational and objective analysis on the issues you are trying to address. The bottom line is that your true motivation is purely the fact that you really don't make much $$$ from actually playing poker, instead w/e few bucks you do end up earning come from RB and promotions. Hence why you are trying so hard to defend the dealt RB method. There is nothing new under the sun, and your arguments and actions are nothing more than advocacy for protectionism. In other words, you are nothing more than a parasite fighting to preserve his "free-lunch"... Unless your IQ is just too low, I sincerely advise you to go to school and get some basic education, in economics, statistics, and logic, b/c right now to those of us who actually have a clue, you just keep making an ass out of yourself.

I've posted nothing but facts. You've done the complete opposite, claiming that, somehow, having the nitty RB grinders turn into good LAG players who play less tables are somehow better for the sites/games.

Let's go ahead and put out a hypothetical out there for the two of us, since you claim to be a winning player, and I am as well. We get our choice of two tables to play at, one filled with 10/9 16-tabling nits who are breakeven/losing players before RB, and the other table is filled with 18/15 4-8 tabling regs who dont depend on RB. Which one do you choose to play at if your only goal is to make money?

It'd be boring as hell, but you choose the nits everytime.

Now tell me, which table will a fish lose his money at faster?

The one filled with the 18/15 regs.

What's my point? There is a perception that Dealt RB makes games nitty/harder. The fact is, nits provide another source of profit for good players, fish lose money slower, and provides more tables to table select from. All of this is GREAT for good players. It's GREAT for the sites. The fish? They're clueless about RB. They don't give a **** about contributed vs. dealt. To them it is moot - and in actuality it is. Contributed RB is nothing more than a rake increase that makes players adjust by forcing them to improve their games. Seriously, what player, no matter the circumstance, wants their opponents to improve?

[Chazley]

Also, thanks for the huge LOL when you try and bash me for 'name-calling', then proceed to write a long post making up stupid insults with no actual articulate thought in the entire post. Seriously, most of your posts in general are about building yourself up and trying to belittle other people. Therefore, I legitimately feel bad for you and your general perspective.